How I'm getting away with free unlimited 3G data on a Page Plus iPhone 4 right now

HowardForums is a discussion board dedicated to mobile phones with over 1,000,000 members and growing!

For your convenience HowardForums is divided into 7 main sections; marketplace, phone manufacturers, carriers, smartphones/PDAs, general phone discussion, buy sell trade and general discussions. Just scroll down to see them!

Only registered members may post questions, contact other members or search our database of over 8 million posts. Why don't you join us today!

(In this case, a prepaid VZW phone where I spend $30 that expires every 90 days. I actually get charged $0 -- my money literally expires unused. THIS is a loophole that won't last long.)

Originally Posted by haydeno

bunch of ebay sellers selling mifis on verizon prepaid so wonder how long this will last before its caught

It could just as easily be the info from -- indeed -- a mifi, phone,USB stick, iPad, or whatever on ANY billing arrangement as long as the donor device's credentials can be read by DFS/CDMA Tool. This, I don't know if they can or will correct.

This actually started out as me wanting to try sharing credentials from a Millenicom 3G USB device with a 20GB quota on my phone. Theoretically this confirms that that would work too.

Correct, I'm "supposed to be" charged $1/day, and I am not because of a loophole.

This may be because the registered/associated device never gets turned on.

As for preventing this, I'm not sure if they can.

However, the part where I'm not being billed can and probably will be fixed.

And as a result, you would be liable for any unbilled back usage charges that they would discover through an audit. That is unless you used fictitious information to create your account with them, which would be outright fraud.

For what it's worth, I'm only stating this as a warning to anyone that potentially wants to abuse this hack - you could be on the wrong end of a legitimate collection action because of it. Of course it does become a matter of whether it ends up worth VZW's time to purse.

And as a result, you would be liable for any unbilled back usage charges that they would discover through an audit. That is unless you used fictitious information to create your account with them, which would be outright fraud.

For what it's worth, I'm only stating this as a warning to anyone that potentially wants to abuse this hack - you could be on the wrong end of a legitimate collection action because of it. Of course it does become a matter of whether it ends up worth VZW's time to purse.

And as a result, you would be liable for any unbilled back usage charges that they would discover through an audit. That is unless you used fictitious information to create your account with them, which would be outright fraud.

For what it's worth, I'm only stating this as a warning to anyone that potentially wants to abuse this hack - you could be on the wrong end of a legitimate collection action because of it. Of course it does become a matter of whether it ends up worth VZW's time to purse.

I'm sure they are using real information LOL

At any rate like I said V could have shut this down a long time ago, obviously they aren't concerned. It's more $ in their piggy bank from folks who probably would not have bought any service otherwise. I'm sure the pencil pushers are running the numbers and it must be favorable or they would have stopped it.

This has been going on for YEARS so it's not exactly breaking news and Verizon is well aware of it. Just Google "Verizon dual NAM." Many people use it for unlimited 3G tethering. All you're doing is removing dun (dial up networking) from the NAI string. Of course, you need a phone that supports dual NAMs, and software that allows you to access, edit, and write to the phone's internal settings. Many phones don't support this. In the case of an iPhone 4 it must have been jailbroken in order to change those settings.

Since he paid for it in the past, I would not think this a "Theft of services"

It would be considered something overlooked by the company coding.

Once they realize this is going on it will simply be blocked. Loophole fixed.

I see this would be considered shady as ****... but it is Verizons fault for not anticipating it.

This actually would fall under Theft of Services in many (most?) states. Here is an example of the Florida law:

812.14 Trespass and larceny with relation to utility fixtures; theft of utility services.—
(1) As used in this section, “utility” includes any person, firm, corporation, association, or political subdivision, whether private, municipal, county, or cooperative, which is engaged in the sale, generation, provision, or delivery of gas, electricity, heat, water, oil, sewer service, telephone service, telegraph service, radio service, or telecommunication service.
(2) It is unlawful to:
(a) Willfully alter, tamper with, injure, or knowingly suffer to be injured any meter, meter seal, pipe, conduit, wire, line, cable, transformer, amplifier, or other apparatus or device belonging to a utility line service in such a manner as to cause loss or damage or to prevent any meter installed for registering electricity, gas, or water from registering the quantity which otherwise would pass through the same; to alter the index or break the seal of any such meter; in any way to hinder or interfere with the proper action or just registration of any such meter or device; or knowingly to use, waste, or suffer the waste, by any means, of electricity or gas or water passing through any such meter, wire, pipe, or fitting, or other appliance or appurtenance connected with or belonging to any such utility, after such meter, wire, pipe or fitting, or other appliance or appurtenance has been tampered with, injured, or altered.
(b) Make or cause to be made any connection with any wire, main, service pipe or other pipes, appliance, or appurtenance in such manner as to use, without the consent of the utility, any service or any electricity, gas, or water, or to cause to be supplied any service or electricity, gas, or water from a utility to any person, firm, or corporation or any lamp, burner, orifice, faucet, or other outlet whatsoever, without such service being reported for payment or such electricity, gas, or water passing through a meter provided by the utility and used for measuring and registering the quantity of electricity, gas, or water passing through the same.
(c) Use or receive the direct benefit from the use of a utility knowing, or under such circumstances as would induce a reasonable person to believe, that such direct benefits have resulted from any tampering with, altering of, or injury to any connection, wire, conductor, meter, pipe, conduit, line, cable, transformer, amplifier, or other apparatus or device owned, operated, or controlled by such utility, for the purpose of avoiding payment.

It's borderline, but at the same time, the language appears to be sufficient to support a court finding theft of services in this instance -- yes, it would appear to be a little bit of a stretch, but when the language is there, it's usually not a good situation to be in.

Under B, using software to download the NAM and other settings and then programming them onto another phone other than the one they were initially assigned by the carrier to (for the purposes of providing / tracking service usage) in a manner that prevents the data usage from being reported (because the intended device is not being turned on / used which would normally report the data usage triggering the $0.99 charge)

Again -- this isn't legal advice, I'm not advising anyone on what is right / wrong under the law, but it is way too close to comfort for me (especially to save $20-$30 a month) -- I think of it this way -- if you are able to get a benefit that the company never intended anyone to get, especially one that requires you to download settings from a device and transport them into one that is ineligible to be activated on the same plan (iPhones cannot be activated on the dumb phone plans) -- legal or not, it is too dishonest for me and not something worth risking any potential (though, based on the amount, unlikely to be pursued) punishment nor is it something I would feel particularly truthful about doing.

There is something fraudulent about using a service and not paying for it.

If you think your "paying $30 for 90 days of service" equates to fair and equitable by your moral standards, that's on you. By the letter of the law, and the fact that the service costs $0.99 per day for mobile data service ON TOP OF your daily usage... well it has been a while since I took a math class but I'm pretty sure $89.10 (actually $178.20) != $30, but it does equal fraud.

There is something fraudulent about using a service and not paying for it.

If you think your "paying $30 for 90 days of service" equates to fair and equitable by your moral standards, that's on you. By the letter of the law, and the fact that the service costs $0.99 per day for mobile data service ON TOP OF your daily usage... well it has been a while since I took a math class but I'm pretty sure $89.10 (actually $178.20) != $30, but it does equal fraud.

Feel free to chime in when you have something intelligent or constructive to add to the discussion.

Feel free to chime in when you have something intelligent or constructive to add to the discussion.

I did exactly that with my post.

Someone needed to take the initiative to point out the actual implications of what you're suggesting with this hack. Having a bill come in the mail, a collection account or a default judgement show up for - say, a hypothetical year of theft to the tune of $602.70 is something that people should weigh very carefully before doing what you suggest. For those not counting, that's the approximate total bill one SHOULD receive on their Verizon prepaid account for daily usage including data less your prepaid "balance". Note: I am not saying anyone will get caught, let alone billed or taken further. But it's what COULD legally happen. Obviously, use at your own risk.

Your last post, on the other hand, most definitely missed the mark in terms of "intelligent or constructive".

Someone needed to take the initiative to point out the actual implications of what you're suggesting with this hack. Having a bill come in the mail, a collection account or a default judgement show up for - say, a hypothetical year of theft to the tune of $602.70 is something that people should weigh very carefully before doing what you suggest. For those not counting, that's the approximate total bill one SHOULD receive on their Verizon prepaid account for daily usage including data less your prepaid "balance". Note: I am not saying anyone will get caught, let alone billed or taken further. But it's what COULD legally happen. Obviously, use at your own risk.

Your last post, on the other hand, most definitely missed the mark in terms of "intelligent or constructive".

I agree with your point about it being wrong morally (as stated in the post I made with the Florida law a few posts up) but unless I'm missing something, as far as I can see there is nothing in the TOS that allows Verizon to bill a prepaid customer for any use in violation of the agreement. The only remedy listed in the TOS that I could find is a right to termination for misuse of the network.

However, there is no exclusivity to the language in the TOS so they could in theory still bill and, even worse, if it were to be found an illegal use, parties would still be subject to whatever ramifications that were to carry.

That said, buying the phones in cash / paying for the pins in cash would shield a party from being discovered to some extent I suppose (but wouldn't the fact someone is intentionally avoiding leaving a trail pretty good evidence they are doing something they at least think is wrong?) but you have to remember that you are attaching these numbers (for data purposes) to your PP phone -- if there is anything that identifies the ESN / MEID that is connecting or anything at all that links your usage (be it cell phone tower locations, etc.) to the "phone side" of the device, you better believe big red can find you (as much as anyone can from a phone number which, if you ask any PI or the likes, is very, very simply and routine)

again, in no way is that legal advice nor should it be construed as such.

I remember there used to be something similar with boost mobile. You could activate a windows smart phone and get basically free Internet acess. It was supposed to charge like .35 a day and you could sign up for it but it worked regardless if you were paying or not. I know many people used that loop hole I don't see how it's really different.

And I highly doubt verizon will take legal action against someone, it really wouldn't be worth there time.. Plus they already make god knows how much money..

That's the first time you've mentioned a Gusto 2. So you're just cloning the Gusto 2's MEID on to the Fascinate so it will activate on Verizon pay as you go.

When I read your first post I though you had discovered that an unmodified Fascinate would activate on pay as you go. Now that would be a big news - but ESN/MEID cloning and using the clone's credentials to set up data on a Page Plus phone - I don't think that's anything new.